RAMASHISH YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) PLACING strong reliance upon a judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of Jogendra Nahak & ors. (AIR 1999 SC 2565) learned counsel for the applicant submits that the statements recorded under Section 164 Cr. PC, if are of the witnesses, who are not sponsored by the prosecution agency, cannot be taken into consideration and as in the present case such statements were taken into consideration, the court below was unjustified in proceeding further in the matter. On the other hand learned counsel for the private respondent so also the State submitted that even if the statements recorded under Section 164 Cr. P.C. are excluded from consideration, the availability of the other material on the record would clearly show that the prosecution has come out with a truthful case and the accused cannot be discharged.

(3.) IN the matter of Jogendra Nahak (supra) the question before the Supreme Court was that whether the High Court was justified in ignoring the statements recorded under Section 164 Cr. P.C. of the witnesses who were not sponsored by the prosecution. After considering the effect and impact of Section 164 Cr. P.C. the Supreme Court observed that the High Court was justified in disallowing the statements of the four appellants to remain on the record in the said case. The Supreme Court further observed that of course the said course will be without prejudice to their evidence being adduced during trial, if any of the parties requires it.